12 48. On December 7, 2004, the Tenth Civil Court of Pichincha ruled in the amparo suit filed by Luís Vicente Rojas Bajaña, one of the members of the Constitutional Court who had been terminated. This decision “denied the processing of this constitutional remedy” pursuant to the Constitutional Court’s resolution of December 2, 2004, “leaving an unconstitutionality suit before the Constitutional Court open for the case.” 23 49. Similarly, on December 13, 2004, the First Civil Court of Pichincha handed down a decision in the amparo suit filed by Miguel Ángel Camba Campos, one of the members of the Constitutional Court who were terminated, against National Congress Resolution No. R-25-160. That resolution states that “it is public knowledge that the National Congress, on Wednesday, December 8 of the current year, proceeded with the impeachment of the members of the Constitutional Court (…) by a majority of its members, in an action that is eminently legal and legitimate in that it is provided for by the Constitution and thus enjoys full legal effect, including the censure caused by immediate dismissal of the official.” 24 It also cites the Constitutional Court’s resolution of December 2, 2004, and concludes that “based on the content of the above ‘whereas’ clauses, the amparo action is inadmissible and must be rejected outright, without examining the merits of the matter.” 25 50. Similarly, on December 14, 2004, the Tenth Civil Court of Pichincha ruled inadmissible the constitutional amparo suit lodged by Mauro Leonidas Terán Cevallos, one of the terminated members of the Constitutional Court. 26 51. Likewise, on December 15, 2004, the Tenth Civil Court of Pichincha ruled inadmissible the constitutional amparo suit lodged by Simún Bolívar Zabala Guzmán, one of the terminated members of the Constitutional Court.27 On that same date, the Eighth Civil Court of Pichincha ruled on the amparo suit brought by Mr. Freddy Oswaldo Cevallos Bueno, a terminated member of the Constitutional Court. Based on Article 2.a of the Supreme Court’s resolution of June 27, 2001, and on the Constitutional Court’s resolution of December 2, 2004, it ruled the amparo action inadmissible. 28 B. The termination of the Supreme Court justices 1. The call for a special session by the President of the Republic and the National Congress’s termination resolution 23 Annex 11. Decision of the Tenth Civil Court of Pichincha, dated December 7, 2004. (Annex to the initial petition received on December 30, 2004.) 24 Annex 12. Decision of the First Civil Court of Pichincha, dated December 13, 2004. (Annex to the initial petition received on December 30, 2004.) 25 Annex 12. Decision of the First Civil Court of Pichincha, dated December 13, 2004. (Annex to the initial petition received on December 30, 2004.) 26 Annex 13. Decision of the Tenth Civil Court of Pichincha, dated December 14, 2004. (Annex to the petitioners’ submission, presented at the hearing held before the IACHR on March 13, 2006.) 27 Annex 14. Decision of the Tenth Civil Court of Pichincha, dated December 15, 2004. (Annex to the petitioners’ submission, presented at the hearing held before the IACHR on March 13, 2006.) 28 Annex 14. Decision of the Eighth Civil Court of Pichincha, dated December 15, 2004. (Annex to the petitioners’ submission, presented at the hearing held before the IACHR on March 13, 2006.)